On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 12:18:17PM +0200, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> MicroPython hashmap implementation is effectively O(n) (average and
> worst case) due to the algorithm parameters chosen (like the load factor
> of 1). Of course, parameters could be tweaked, but the ones chosen are
> so because the memory usage is far more important for MicroPython
> systems than performance characteristics (all due to small amounts of
> memory). Like, MicroPython was twice as fast than Python 3.3 on
> average, and 1000 times more efficient in the memory usage.
$ cat xxx.py
def pi_float():
"""native float"""
lasts, t, s, n, na, d, da = 0, 3.0, 3, 1, 0, 0, 24
while s != lasts:
lasts = s
n, na = n+na, na+8
d, da = d+da, da+32
t = (t * n) / d
s += t
return s
for i in range(100000):
x = pi_float()
$ time ./micropython xxx.py
real 0m4.424s
user 0m4.406s
sys 0m0.016s
$
$ time ../../cpython/python xxx.py
real 0m1.066s
user 0m1.056s
sys 0m0.010s
Congratulations ...
Stefan Krah
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
